Semantics, or something more?

[Guest]

 

[zipman]

Hi everyone. This is my first post here.

I've had some lengthy conversations with one of your (I believe) fairly regular posters about what constitues "real" BDSM as opposed to "nonserious" (for want of a better term) BDSM.

I'm confused.

How do different dominants approach tying someone up or administering a sexy spanking, so that in one case the dominant is "real" and in the other case a dominant is a "wannabe?"

Lioness

Welcome LionessInWinter,

The subject you raise is a touchy one. On the one hand, people should feel free to practice BDSM as they choose, based on their needs and desires without being judged by others as to how "real" they are.

To someone who lives the lifestyle 24/7, I might not seem "real" to them as I only enjoy BDSM in the bedroom. I have seen the same "discussion" occur in religion, because someone is not a good "Jew" or "Catholic" because they do not dedicate themselves to it as much as another person.

On the other hand, there are "players" both men and women, Dom/me and sub who profess a love for the lifestyle, but have ulterior motives. These are people whose primary concern is getting laid, and they are willing to "play along" with BDSM as long as it accomplishes their goals.

Given that even this scenario is judgmental, I think that as long as a person is honest with themselves and with others about their desires and the level to which they want to incorporate BDSM in their lives, then they are "real." I think it is about motivations, honesty, passion, desire, sexual pleasure through dominating or submitting as opposed to a question of technique.

What you have described is more a question of experience as opposed to "reality."

Welcome again and good to see you posting here.

 

[sterlingclay]

Hi everyone. This is my first post here.

I've had some lengthy conversations with one of your (I believe) fairly regular posters about what constitues "real" BDSM as opposed to "nonserious" (for want of a better term) BDSM.

I'm confused.

How do different dominants approach tying someone up or administering a sexy spanking, so that in one case the dominant is "real" and in the other case a dominant is a "wannabe?"

Lioness

I think there is quite a big difference. I'm mostly a wannabee. Sex is a big world full of all kinds of possibilities. For me BDSM is a world I dabble in lightly. If a hold a role in BDSM it is as a switch. I don't assume a position rigth off either. I let the flow take care of that. I'm a wannabee.

The real players though know what they're doing as far as technique, pyschology, and use of equippment. They know how to introduce BDSM virgins into their world without scaring them off.

In short, Pro dommes are professinals and I, like most people playing around are amatures treading softly, careful not to break through the thin ice. (ok, so maybe there are those that don't care about safety and what not)

 

[cellis]

Hi everyone. This is my first post here.

I've had some lengthy conversations with one of your (I believe) fairly regular posters about what constitues "real" BDSM as opposed to "nonserious" (for want of a better term) BDSM.

I'm confused.

How do different dominants approach tying someone up or administering a sexy spanking, so that in one case the dominant is "real" and in the other case a dominant is a "wannabe?"

Lioness

Welcome to this side of Lit, Lioness.

BDSM can be quite confusing. I can tell you that there are all kinds of dominants about. You have to first know what you want or have a good idea of what you are looking for and you have to be able to protect yourself in the mean time while you are looking.

Check the Library thead. There is a wealth of information in there. WriterDom had an excellent thread on predators. I suggest you read that.

If you want more personal information, feel free to pm me.

 

[sterlingclay]

I think it is about motivations, honesty, passion, desire, sexual pleasure through dominating or submitting as opposed to a question of technique.

Yes, technique can be learned by anyone and yes, watch out for those who are only in for the sex but hide behind a facade. Have you ever tried whipping someone? It's not that easy. I don't think there is anything wrong with BDSM for sex. But don't hide behind it. Be honest.
Whip me! It feels pleasurable.

 

[Guest]

 

[Guest]

 

[zipman]

Thanks, zip. We're often of like minds on things, I'm finding.

Sterling--you bring up something that has been bothering me a little from my previous conversations.

These "professional" doms, do their one on one relationships exist the way non-BDSM relationships do? I mean, does a professional dominant who's married make his wife eggs in the morning and do the laundry for her and stuff, or is the dominant/submissive relationship in place constantly?

I'm trying to get a take on where the love part of it comes in, cause the person I was communicating with cast a lot of coldness on it.

Thanks for your answers, guys.
L.

Again LIW, the diversity of the BDSM community comes into play. There are people who would not play with someone that they are not in love with, and some for whom love (romantic love) plays little to no part.

Some of this depends on the preferences of the people involved and some of it depends on other factors. A sub who may greatly desire to scene might meet up with a Dom for a night, or on a regular basis so each can enjoy the pleasures of BDSM without being in any sort of relationship.

Combine the different desires that people have with their different emotional and sexual needs and you sometimes get a "marraige fo convenience." I have scened with women that I had little to no feeling for and I have scened with women who I am madly in love with.

While I absolutely prefer scening with someone I love, that too can add complexity to the equation. I find that I sometimes am more hesitant to push a sub I am in love with as their are other aspects to our relationship that I try and balance.

Unfortunately, the best thing in getting some of these answers is to educate yourself, be introspective, be honest about your needs and desires as you uncover them, communicate these things honestly to your partner, and then reevaluate how you feel again.

It can be a somewhat long but very worthwhile journey!

 

[cellis]

Re: Re: Re: Semantics, or something more?

Well, that's just the thing, cellis. Why is it confusing?

It seems to me that creating a hierarchy about it is something that's better left to people who think in the box, instead of out of it.

Course, I don't know shit about it, except that it can be fun. .

L.

I can tell you what I like. I can explain the process I went through. I can tell you this is a process, this journey of self discovery. I am still in the process.

In the beginning, I was uncertain... I thought things just had to be one way. The I looked, the more I realized that this whole thing... BDSM... it what you make it. It is what you want it to be.

You are right it is fun. But for me it is oh so very much more than that.

You asked about love. I was not looking for love, but for a Dom when I met Himself and gradually we fell in love. There are many here who are married couples.

There are no right or wrong answers here.

As for creating a hierarchy... what that is up to you. But it doesn't necessarily hold true for all of us.

 

[zipman]

Re: Re: Re: Semantics, or something more?

Well, that's just the thing, cellis. Why is it confusing?

It seems to me that creating a hierarchy about it is something that's better left to people who think in the box, instead of out of it.

Course, I don't know shit about it, except that it can be fun. .

L.

LIW,

A heirarchy is by definition, confining BDSM which kind of goes against what it is all about. As Cellis stated, it is about making it right for you, finding out what really turns you on and how big a part you want it to play in your life.

It can be a wonderful journey of sexual exploration and discovery. Why confine it? Relax and enjoy it, whether through literature, online, or in person.

 

[Guest]

 

[Guest]

 

[sterlingclay]

All I can say is...

Thanks, zip. We're often of like minds on things, I'm finding.

Sterling--you bring up something that has been bothering me a little from my previous conversations.

These "professional" doms, do their one on one relationships exist the way non-BDSM relationships do? I mean, does a professional dominant who's married make his wife eggs in the morning and do the laundry for her and stuff, or is the dominant/submissive relationship in place constantly?

I'm trying to get a take on where the love part of it comes in, cause the person I was communicating with cast a lot of coldness on it.

Thanks for your answers, guys.
L.

Different strokes for different folks. There are a lot of in-betweens for BDSM couples. I have a friend who is a dom and his relationship with his wife is a dom-sub relationship but you would never notice. The sub just want's someone to look after her and the master wants someone to look after. I hate to say it, but it's almost Freudian. The "looking after" business might seem confusing but look at like this. A dog would do anything for his master and he knows he'll be protected and fed and LOVED. (Don't mean to compare dogs and subs but can you all think of a better comparison?)

Sterling

 

[Hecate]

How do different dominants approach tying someone up or administering a sexy spanking, so that in one case the dominant is "real" and in the other case a dominant is a "wannabe?"

Lioness

Those who have been "hanging out here" for a while will know that the use of "wannabe" will set me off on one of my "crusades" again. *lol*

For me a "wannabe" is a pretender, and I have seen it mentioned somewhere further above... if you use the guise of "Domination" just to get a quick lay, if you declare yourself a Master/Mistress without any basic knowledge of D/s dynamics, without having that urge to be in charge and control for the sake of your own personality, then to me that is "fake BDSM".

It is completely totaly legitimate BDSM to practice "kinky sex" as long as this is all the deal is about, as long as there are no other promises being made. Real BDSM is not necessarrily linked to 24/7 Master/slave setups imo.

A wannabe is NOT someone without experience but a sincere will to get involved in whatever degree of BDSM he/she sees fit and willing to educate themselves to that purpose. Those are novice Dominants or submissives who at some stage still might decide it is not for them, but are entering fully aware into the miraculous mysterious realm of BDSM.


Another "real/unreal" BDSM-divider may be online-virtual-cyber vs. "hands-on-ouchie-stop doing that" . As we all know though - otherwise we wouldn't be wasting our time discussing things right now ruight here - online issues can be very real for us, and are an integral part of how we conceive our world. Wherther real/unreal is the right word of distinction between the two ... I shall leave that to the individual to judge.


BDSM is not readily available to many of us - you have to be lucky to have the respective groups to join in your neighborhood or to find a partner that complements your desires to live BDSM daily. Then there is no doubt about the "reality factor". For those among us searching - exploring - with only the odd expeirence in the past and a lot of hope for the future, BDSM is no less a real aspect of who and what we are.

It becomes "fake" though if we only cloak ourselves in black leather and attach a whip to our belts, or respectively cuffs to our wrists, but our hearts and sentiments are not in the delicious equilibrium of Power Exchange and the giving or receiving of sensations and stimulation, but we only use the "exotic attraction of the dark and perverted" to score another vanilla lay.

"Do as thou wilt" - I go by that, but I listen to what it is I really want ... and if your deepest desires and heart isn't in it, then don't wield a whip! Not only are you betraying your partner, but you are cheating yourself from finding what you really want and need


Edited to add another attempt of answering the original question without being carried away on "wannabes" *chuckles*

Serious vs. non-serious Domination:

As I read through the whole thread again, another thought occured to me ... could it be that with real/non-serious Domination the topic was more leaning towards the Top/bottom vs. Dom/sub discussion?

Arrgh - have I just confused you further? Sorry - I shall try to elaborate some of the thought-patters that I have encountered....

The Top/bottom relation usually indicates a strictly action-related (usually bedroom-confined) pattern, in which one person has the more active, decisive part, that top-partner will be the one to tie up the other, distribute a spanking or flogging to the bottom-partner, basicly actively determining the scene, thus defining the bottom-part as the receiving, more passive side. As opposed to a Dom/sub relation though, this power exchange is merely based on this set of actions for sexual purposes, there is no "obligation" of the bottom part to submit to any wishes or demands of the Top on an emotionla basis (not sure if that made sense to anyone but me .... )

So for those who see the complete BDSM power exchange only valid when it has happened emotionally as well as physically, this form of BDSM may seem "unreal" as it does not include the "turning over of ones complete self", thus top/bottom scenarios are less of a emotional issue and are usually "used" when you have leisurely kinky s/m oriented play time with whoever.

For some it only is "real" BDSM when you get the power to decide over more aspects of another's life than just the way of love-making, when your word is his/her command.

So according to my above ramble I'd say:

If I pick up a cute subbie at a club, engange in a scene for mutual fun but without any further emotional strings attached, that may be "unreal"? (ok - not for me but I have to stick to my attempts from above, right?)

When I then come home and my sub takes off my shoes, serves me a drink and ends up in the same kind of entaglement as has the "club-sub" (*lol* mhhh - why is that making me feel hungry? ) eventually just because I feel like it and my pet will do whatever it takes to make me feel happy, then it is "real" becasue it serves more than just sexual gratification but is the way we define the power in our relation.

________________________________________

PS:
There are as many definitions most likely as there are "practicioners", so I would assume suit yourself and create a definition that feels right for you.

 

[Ebonyfire]

Hi everyone. This is my first post here.

I've had some lengthy conversations with one of your (I believe) fairly regular posters about what constitues "real" BDSM as opposed to "nonserious" (for want of a better term) BDSM.

I'm confused.

How do different dominants approach tying someone up or administering a sexy spanking, so that in one case the dominant is "real" and in the other case a dominant is a "wannabe?"

Lioness

Since my business keeps me busy 24/7, I do not have time to worry about labels and categorizing other people. I mind my own business. And if someone else thinks I am not "real" or "true", who cares, they are not supporting me and mine.


I find that the people who have to put people in these little bins are not really doing anything themselves, they just like to categorize others to try to make them feel inadequate so that they can feel superior.

If it is "real" to you and your partner, then it is real enough.

Eb

 

[Guest]

 

[Guest]

 

[Ebonyfire]

Re: Re: Re: Semantics, or something more?

I so agree with you here, Ebony.

PB and Lance and Zip were right--the people in this forum are nice. Thanks for the warm welcome.

Lioness

In my zeal to post I forgot to welcome you. Hope you enjoy the lively interactions here.

Eb

 

[Ebonyfire]

Re: Re: Semantics, or something more?

Those who have been "hanging out here" for a while will know that the use of "wannabe" will set me off on one of my "crusades" again. *lol*

For me a "wannabe" is a pretender, and I have seen it mentioned somewhere further above... if you use the guise of "Domination" just to get a quick lay, if you declare yourself a Master/Mistress without any basic knowledge of D/s dynamics, without having that urge to be in charge and control for the sake of your own personality, then to me that is "fake BDSM".

It is completely totaly legitimate BDSM to practice "kinky sex" as long as this is all the deal is about, as long as there are no other promises being made. Real BDSM is not necessarrily linked to 24/7 Master/slave setups imo.

A wannabe is NOT someone without experience but a sincere will to get involved in whatever degree of BDSM he/she sees fit and willing to educate themselves to that purpose. Those are novice Dominants or submissives who at some stage still might decide it is not for them, but are entering fully aware into the miraculous mysterious realm of BDSM.


Another "real/unreal" BDSM-divider may be online-virtual-cyber vs. "hands-on-ouchie-stop doing that" . As we all know though - otherwise we wouldn't be wasting our time discussing things right now ruight here - online issues can be very real for us, and are an integral part of how we conceive our world. Wherther real/unreal is the right word of distinction between the two ... I shall leave that to the individual to judge.


BDSM is not readily available to many of us - you have to be lucky to have the respective groups to join in your neighborhood or to find a partner that complements your desires to live BDSM daily. Then there is no doubt about the "reality factor". For those among us searching - exploring - with only the odd expeirence in the past and a lot of hope for the future, BDSM is no less a real aspect of who and what we are.

It becomes "fake" though if we only cloak ourselves in black leather and attach a whip to our belts, or respectively cuffs to our wrists, but our hearts and sentiments are not in the delicious equilibrium of Power Exchange and the giving or receiving of sensations and stimulation, but we only use the "exotic attraction of the dark and perverted" to score another vanilla lay.

"Do as thou wilt" - I go by that, but I listen to what it is I really want ... and if your deepest desires and heart isn't in it, then don't wield a whip! Not only are you betraying your partner, but you are cheating yourself from finding what you really want and need


Edited to add another attempt of answering the original question without being carried away on "wannabes" *chuckles*

Serious vs. non-serious Domination:

As I read through the whole thread again, another thought occured to me ... could it be that with real/non-serious Domination the topic was more leaning towards the Top/bottom vs. Dom/sub discussion?

Arrgh - have I just confused you further? Sorry - I shall try to elaborate some of the thought-patters that I have encountered....

The Top/bottom relation usually indicates a strictly action-related (usually bedroom-confined) pattern, in which one person has the more active, decisive part, that top-partner will be the one to tie up the other, distribute a spanking or flogging to the bottom-partner, basicly actively determining the scene, thus defining the bottom-part as the receiving, more passive side. As opposed to a Dom/sub relation though, this power exchange is merely based on this set of actions for sexual purposes, there is no "obligation" of the bottom part to submit to any wishes or demands of the Top on an emotionla basis (not sure if that made sense to anyone but me .... )

So for those who see the complete BDSM power exchange only valid when it has happened emotionally as well as physically, this form of BDSM may seem "unreal" as it does not include the "turning over of ones complete self", thus top/bottom scenarios are less of a emotional issue and are usually "used" when you have leisurely kinky s/m oriented play time with whoever.

For some it only is "real" BDSM when you get the power to decide over more aspects of another's life than just the way of love-making, when your word is his/her command.

So according to my above ramble I'd say:

If I pick up a cute subbie at a club, engange in a scene for mutual fun but without any further emotional strings attached, that may be "unreal"? (ok - not for me but I have to stick to my attempts from above, right?)

When I then come home and my sub takes off my shoes, serves me a drink and ends up in the same kind of entaglement as has the "club-sub" (*lol* mhhh - why is that making me feel hungry? ) eventually just because I feel like it and my pet will do whatever it takes to make me feel happy, then it is "real" becasue it serves more than just sexual gratification but is the way we define the power in our relation.

________________________________________

PS:
There are as many definitions most likely as there are "practicioners", so I would assume suit yourself and create a definition that feels right for you.

As usual, WOW.

Eb

 

[artful]

As Usual,...

...many important and truthful posts on this thread,...as we are accustomed to in this Forum.
Welcome to the Forum LIW!

I would add,...to me,...BDSM is totally about Power Echange between like minded people. There are training techniques,...there are sexual needs involved,...and each person should have the right to pursue BDSM in whatever flavor they desire.

What makes or breaks a BDSM relationship, ...is TRUTH. Your own inner truth. Is the relationship based on your inner truth? Fantasy and reality are two separate worlds,...but they can be successfully merged in BDSM.

Unlike other sexual relationships,...BDSM must *be* a Power Exchange, (even if for a limited time or circumstance). Really,...it is a committment that can't be found elsewhere. That committment, (in order to be of any value), must be sincere.

In order for that to happen,...one must not lie to themself. They can't deny their *inner truth*.

In explanation:
If a Dom/me or sub is doing something to appease their partner,...but take no joy or pride in doing
that,...and says to the other,..."Oh yes,...I love doing this for you." That is deception.

It has to be based on truth,...or it is not BDSM. Typical marriages can be successfully done for many reasons,...financial,...societal,... convenience,...etc.

BDSM should only be based in truth,...(even if for only 5 minutes). If you don't have truth,...there is no BDSM. BDSM is a Power Exchange,...nothing more,...and nothing less.

Kinky sex is kinky sex,...but it may not be BDSM.

JMHO,...but it's mine,...and I own it.

 

[MissTaken]

Hello there, Lioness!

It is nice to see you visiting the underworld!


Semantics?
I think not. There are varying degrees of participation and desire in and for a BDSM relationship.

I have posted about posers and pretenders but now, feel that to get into that discussion isn't a good use of precious bandwidth. Emotions run high, flames begin and well, you know the rest!

However, theory and practice of BDSM are very personal issues and depend on the individual. BDSM is present when there is a power exchange based on truth, trust, communication and need.

To that end, I believe the power exchange is the fundamental difference between D/s and kinky sex.

However, to each his own.

 

[lark sparrow]

What a wonderful discussion! I have nothing to add that hasn't been said, but I do have one question.

Where I am from, a "player" is a person truly involved in (r/l) BDSM - no negative attachment - as in a "heavy or light player". Anyone else?

Online I have noticed that "wannabe" and "player" are often expressed as the same thing. Just curious.

 

[sterlingclay]

Wow! What a post, Hecate, thank you.

You made me smile in your first bit there, because I sort of launched into a crusade of my own about the wannabe thing.

So I get ya on that .

What surprised me to read was your good paragraph on top/bottom and dom/sub. I thought the vernacular implied just the opposite! It does help to converse knowing the right terms for things.

I don't really feel like I'm exploring much, or seeking much in the way a lot of people seem to mean it here. I found it strange that the labels I was hearing were supposed to define people, and made an implication that I should think of someone in a good or bad way dependent on that.

I have my own dichotomy that I'd someday like to figure out, and this is where my real interest lies. While I thoroughly enjoy a strong man in and out of the bedroom, the very things which make me want to submit to him in the bedroom can be a source of great irritation and hurt to me in other aspects of the relationship. How do you deal with it, that's what I'd like to know--without going crazy with frustration or just slipping away? I think just having to ask that question makes me a not-very submissive person.

Thank you for your considered reply, Hecate. I appreciate the time you took to help me.

Lioness

You are as I dabbling in the world of under.

So according to Hecate, you seek something more along the lines of a Top-bottom arrangement. (thanks H, for clearing that up). But likely, not all the time. Hey that's fine. We live in an unfortunate world where labels rule us. I say, be selfish and find someone (or a few someones ) that fit your mold.

Ciao bella

 

[artful]

A viewpoint

To me,...there are only insincere predators,...and sincere participants. The motivation that drives them to search for a BDSM relationship is what truly is the only definative line that can separate the two.

Is it a selfish need that is being pursued,...or, is it a compatible relationship that serves both sides, they wish to establish?

Experience, and/or longevity has little to do with
the relationship. A *real* BDSM relationship based upon truth and sincerity will flourish. One that is based on insincerity,...will flounder.

I have been involved with both, and for different lengths of time. It truly is difficult to separate the two. Often,...only time will tell.
Sometimes it is blatantly displayed at the very beginning of a relationship, that one person or another is the predator, ( a selfishly motivated individual). It can be a PRETEND,...sub or Dom/me. It can be male or female.

Those who PRETEND to be something they are not,...are by my definition,...*PREDATORS*.

I know this sounds*high minded*, but I don't mean it to be,...it is only the TRUTH. I am a control freak. I would never want to excercise control over every aspect of a subs life.

I truly would wish for them to have the freedom of expression, and pursuit of goals they desired. In some of those areas, I would want *control*,...but many,...I would not.

Where I would want to exert *control*,...are areas where I believe they *need* to be controlled, (IE) ***I can do a better job***.

Of course, this perspective, this viewpoint, is from what most of us understand, to be a 24/7 BDSM relationship, (there are many other valid BDSM relationships). (YMMV))

I think most people,...when they hear about BDSM, they think only in terms of sex. It is not about sex,...it is about *POWER EXCHANGE*.

It is about submission and Dominance. It is about establishing THAT relationship,(even for a brief 5 minute *play*).

It *is*,..."My way or the highway." Selfish you say? Not at all,...just truthful. I have my wants, needs, and desires. I would never force myself on a woman, but if her wants, needs, and desires, complimented my own. There *is* heaven on earth,...I know,...I have had it.

Many years of it,...in REAL life. There is nothing better.

JMHO,...but it's mine,...and I own it.

 

[MissTaken]

I am curious to see of artful agrees with me...

I do believe that there are many who are submissive or dominant, who live D/s to the degree to which they are happy and comfortable and who may never venture into using anacronyms or labels for their relationship.

It just is what it is.

I liked this statement :

I have my own dichotomy that I'd someday like to figure out, and this is where my real interest lies. While I thoroughly enjoy a strong man in and out of the bedroom, the very things which make me want to submit to him in the bedroom can be a source of great irritation and hurt to me in other aspects of the relationship. How do you deal with it, that's what I'd like to know--without going crazy with frustration or just slipping away? I think just having to ask that question makes me a not-very submissive person.

Lioness,
You nailed it! There is a dichotomy and the trick for an unattached submissive person is to find someone who tickles their mind, makes their heart race, can laugh with them and also , enjoys the dichotomy. For many, D/s belongs only in the context of the bedroom or sexual relationship, and a strong, intelligent, independent woman is desired by Doms who share your view.

For some, BDSM is a lifestyle and impacts all aspects of the relationship. For others, it is a sexual preference and defines lov making. For many more, there fall somewhere in between....